2025-03-11 16:59:51 <@fale:fale.io> !startmeeting FESCO (2025-03-11)
2025-03-11 17:00:02 <@fale:fale.io> Chairs: @conan_kudo:matrix.org, @ngompa:fedora.im, @nirik:matrix.scrye.com, @humaton:fedora.im, @zbyszek:fedora.im, @sgallagh:fedora.im, @fale:fale.io, @dcantrell:fedora.im, @decathorpe:fedora.im, @salimma:fedora.im
2025-03-11 17:00:02 <@fale:fale.io> !meetingname fesco
2025-03-11 17:00:08 <@fale:fale.io> !hi
2025-03-11 17:00:11 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-03-11 16:59:51 UTC
2025-03-11 17:00:11 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'FESCO (2025-03-11)'
2025-03-11 17:00:20 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting Name is now fesco
2025-03-11 17:00:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-11 17:00:26 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek)
2025-03-11 17:00:27 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fabio Alessandro Locati (fale) - he / him / his
2025-03-11 17:01:14 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-11 17:01:15 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his
2025-03-11 17:01:30 <@tslee_:matrix.org> !hi
2025-03-11 17:01:32 <@zodbot:fedora.im> No Fedora Accounts users have the @tslee_:matrix.org Matrix Account defined
2025-03-11 17:02:13 <@humaton:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-11 17:02:14 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Tomáš Hrčka (humaton) - he / him / his
2025-03-11 17:02:17 <@fale:fale.io> we have a quorum :)
2025-03-11 17:02:21 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-11 17:02:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-03-11 17:03:01 <@fale:fale.io> !topic #3364 F42 Incomplete Changes Report
2025-03-11 17:03:03 <@fale:fale.io> !fesco 3364
2025-03-11 17:03:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2025-03-11 17:03:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3364** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3364):**F42 Incomplete Changes Report**
2025-03-11 17:03:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-03-11 17:03:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** 3 weeks ago by amoloney
2025-03-11 17:03:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** 19 hours ago
2025-03-11 17:03:43 <@fale:fale.io> I would go on the whole list and create a topic each, if a decision to postpone was already made, just add an info and go forward
2025-03-11 17:04:05 <@fale:fale.io> !topic KTLS implementation for GnuTLS
2025-03-11 17:04:13 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-11 17:04:14 <@zodbot:fedora.im> David Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his
2025-03-11 17:04:28 <@fale:fale.io> !info decided on 25/02 to retarget for F43
2025-03-11 17:04:53 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Systemd Security Hardening
2025-03-11 17:05:09 <@fale:fale.io> !info decided on 25/02 to drop due to lack on activity
2025-03-11 17:05:20 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Unify bin and sbin
2025-03-11 17:05:40 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 it was marked to re-discuss it
2025-03-11 17:05:55 <@fale:fale.io> Do we have any updates on this from zbyszek  or others?
2025-03-11 17:06:41 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> This is mostly done. There are some minor issues still not resolved, but I think that those can be treated as bugs and resolved as we find them.
2025-03-11 17:07:25 <@tslee_:matrix.org> !hi leeiitb
2025-03-11 17:07:27 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Thomas Stephen Lee (leeiitb)
2025-03-11 17:07:35 <@fale:fale.io> How minor are the issues?
2025-03-11 17:09:16 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think the only real issue is handling of alternatives. For now, I submitted workaround pull request for sendmail.
2025-03-11 17:09:22 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Everything else seems to work.
2025-03-11 17:10:00 <@fale:fale.io> Should we consider it as done, then?
2025-03-11 17:10:01 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> There were some plans to handle this natively in alternatives. It probably wouldn't be too hard. I'll speak with the maintainers again.
2025-03-11 17:10:33 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> It's in ON_QA, the same as other changes.
2025-03-11 17:10:43 <@fale:fale.io> oki!
2025-03-11 17:11:34 <@fale:fale.io> !info change is ON_QA. One issue still open with sendmail, but a workaround PR has been submitted 
2025-03-11 17:11:51 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Anaconda as native Wayland application
2025-03-11 17:12:08 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 it was marked to re-discuss it
2025-03-11 17:12:24 <@fale:fale.io> Has someone spoke with jkonecny about this one?
2025-03-11 17:13:15 <@fale:fale.io> bug (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2307282) is in MODIFIED state, atm
2025-03-11 17:14:13 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> There is a bunch of bugs open against Anaconda related to the installation process and marked as Beta blockers.
2025-03-11 17:14:47 <@zbyszek:fedora.im>  	2347151 	anaconda-webui 	POST 	use entire disk by default seems risky
2025-03-11 17:15:18 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Hmm, actually just the one. I thought that there were more.
2025-03-11 17:15:35 <@fale:fale.io> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2347151
2025-03-11 17:16:14 <@fale:fale.io> !info it was accepted as a Beta Freeze Exception - This seems very low risk, and the new default to make a destructive action a deliberate choice makes sense to us.
2025-03-11 17:16:57 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think we need some input from QA and other people working with the installer. 
2025-03-11 17:17:55 <@fale:fale.io> Shall we put it for next week to rediscuss?
2025-03-11 17:18:15 <@fale:fale.io> I don't think it was
2025-03-11 17:18:16 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Was that actually brought to us?
2025-03-11 17:19:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2278655
2025-03-11 17:19:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2278658
2025-03-11 17:19:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2278866
2025-03-11 17:19:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Hmm, looking at this some more, the Change page lists a number of bugs:
2025-03-11 17:19:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> about implementing the api in various components. Those are all NEW.
2025-03-11 17:19:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2278874
2025-03-11 17:19:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2278869
2025-03-11 17:19:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2278656
2025-03-11 17:19:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2278864
2025-03-11 17:20:33 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/issues/7761
2025-03-11 17:20:44 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> (one week ago)
2025-03-11 17:20:44 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> 
2025-03-11 17:20:44 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> > I plan to work on this if nobody else beats me to it.
2025-03-11 17:21:23 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> So I think the status is that the part in Anaconda has been implemented, but the corresponding changes in all the graphical environments haven't been implemented.
2025-03-11 17:22:12 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://pagure.io/fedora-kde/SIG/issue/504 was closed as FIXED. So it seems KDE actually implemented this ~7 months ago.
2025-03-11 17:22:22 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://pagure.io/fedora-kde/SIG/issue/504 was closed as FIXED. So it seems KDE actually implemented this ~8 months ago.
2025-03-11 17:23:02 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Backdoor approach to making KDE the default desktop? ;-)
2025-03-11 17:23:26 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Also sway, https://gitlab.com/fedora/sigs/sway/SIG/-/issues/36, which does not to live keyboard switch at all :)
2025-03-11 17:23:53 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> So we have a choice. Fedora 42 can be either sway or kde. Other spins will need to be dropped.
2025-03-11 17:24:00 <@fale:fale.io> yes, it seems like only KDE and Sway are ready for this change
2025-03-11 17:24:40 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I assume the *real* answer here is that this is postponed to F43?
2025-03-11 17:25:20 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Yeah, but I think we should get a confirmation from Jiří.
2025-03-11 17:25:20 <@fale:fale.io> I would lean toward that as well
2025-03-11 17:26:49 <@fale:fale.io> should someone take an action to discuss with Jiri before next meeting?
2025-03-11 17:27:37 <@humaton:fedora.im> I can ping him
2025-03-11 17:27:58 <@fale:fale.io> !action jednorozec will ping jkonecny to understand the progress on this
2025-03-11 17:28:36 <@fale:fale.io> !agreed discuss this again next week
2025-03-11 17:28:55 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Setuptools 74+
2025-03-11 17:29:13 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 it was marked ON_QA with one bug standing
2025-03-11 17:29:41 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think there's only one package left:
2025-03-11 17:29:44 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2319698
2025-03-11 17:29:58 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !rhbug 2319698
2025-03-11 17:30:09 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !bug 2319698
2025-03-11 17:30:10 <@zodbot:fedora.im> RHBZ#2319698 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2319698): [python-pyemd]: python-pyemd fails to build with setuptools 74+
2025-03-11 17:31:17 <@fale:fale.io> It seems like the issue is coming from the fact that python-pyemd depends on NumPy 2.x and the python-pyemd is not very active upstream
2025-03-11 17:31:19 <@salimma:fedora.im> it's already using pytest, interesting
2025-03-11 17:31:32 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Anyway, the Change is done.
2025-03-11 17:31:40 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> We have python-setuptools-74.1.3-5.fc42.
2025-03-11 17:31:49 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah, it's very likely not a setuptools issue
2025-03-11 17:32:00 <@salimma:fedora.im> last release was 2023 so the package is... "up to date"
2025-03-11 17:32:28 <@fale:fale.io> !info Change is ON_QA state, one last bug open (#2319698)
2025-03-11 17:32:38 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Retire zbus v1
2025-03-11 17:32:55 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 the change was essentially fully implemented
2025-03-11 17:33:53 <@fale:fale.io> awesome :)
2025-03-11 17:33:58 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> yup it's all done 
2025-03-11 17:34:00 <@fale:fale.io> !info change is done
2025-03-11 17:34:11 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Anaconda WebUI Partitioning
2025-03-11 17:34:55 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 it was marked to discuss it again
2025-03-11 17:35:02 <@fale:fale.io> do we have any info from Jiri on this?
2025-03-11 17:35:37 <@salimma:fedora.im> wait, two webui topic?
2025-03-11 17:35:41 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> This one is being actively worked on. The bug that was discussed above is more for this part.
2025-03-11 17:36:02 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> The previous topic was "Anaconda on Wayland".
2025-03-11 17:36:13 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Two interleaved topics, formally separate.
2025-03-11 17:37:01 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think the answer for this one is that it's "on good track".
2025-03-11 17:37:11 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I still wonder how setting LUKS encryption password (or passwords in general) is supposed to work if you can't set the keyboard layout for the installer ...
2025-03-11 17:37:34 <@salimma:fedora.im> ah, the anaconda-webui bug popped up in the discussion earlier so that got them mixed in my head
2025-03-11 17:38:52 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini: Even if the layout is "wrong", as long as the layout is *consistently* wrong between the installer env and the encryption password-entry, it kind of works?
2025-03-11 17:39:10 <@m4rtink:fedora.im> as long as you set a new passphrase, its actually much more important to set the same layout that was used to type it to vconsole, so you can actually unlock it
2025-03-11 17:39:33 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> the password entry at boot should use the configured keyboard layout
2025-03-11 17:39:57 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> on my system Plymouth entry uses "de" Layout same as when I installed this machine 
2025-03-11 17:40:06 <@fale:fale.io> what happens with upgrades? there could be a mismatch?
2025-03-11 17:40:18 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I actually had the server installer dvd running, so it's easy to check. The button with the keyboard seems inactive, i.e. it's not possible to set the keymap.
2025-03-11 17:40:26 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini: I agree it needs to work that way. I'm saying that sometimes two bugs cancel each other out :)
2025-03-11 17:40:59 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> only if you never use cryptsetup command-line tools ;)
2025-03-11 17:40:59 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Ah, no. If I add a second keyboard layout, I can switch.
2025-03-11 17:41:22 <@m4rtink:fedora.im> BTW, Anaconda can set the vconsole/plymouth layout just fine, its just the GNOME Shell + Wayland environment with lacking APIs that is problematic & where we just can't call an API to set the layout or even reliably get the currently active layout :P
2025-03-11 17:41:28 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini: This is why I rely on NBDE whenever possible
2025-03-11 17:42:07 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Not Bother Disambiguating ... Ecronym?
2025-03-11 17:42:19 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Sorry, "Network-bound disk encryption"
2025-03-11 17:42:41 <@fale:fale.io> can we make progress on this today or should we ask Jiri for more info/update?
2025-03-11 17:42:58 <@m4rtink:fedora.im> Other Environments (GNOME Kiosk used on the boot.iso, IIRC KDE and others) support the localed API for keyboard layout control on Wayland & would not be affected by this issue.
2025-03-11 17:43:15 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> see, this is what I'm worried about. if the new UI is going to be used on Workstation and Worstation doesn't support it, it's bad
2025-03-11 17:43:43 <@fale:fale.io> personally, I'm always a bit worried when there are issues with encrypted disks
2025-03-11 17:45:10 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Oh, we still have dbus-broker and dbus-daemon running in the installer :(
2025-03-11 17:45:18 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Both?
2025-03-11 17:45:30 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> All three.
2025-03-11 17:45:39 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Three?
2025-03-11 17:45:45 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I.e. at least dbus-broker --system, dbus-broker --user, and dbus-daemon for something else.
2025-03-11 17:45:46 <@humaton:fedora.im> huh
2025-03-11 17:45:54 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> oof
2025-03-11 17:46:11 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Maybe it's still the accessibility stuff.
2025-03-11 17:46:42 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Ah, no, it's Anaconda.
2025-03-11 17:46:59 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> `dbus-daemon --config-file=/usr/share/anaconda/dbus/anaconda-bus.conf`
2025-03-11 17:50:18 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> OK, so I did a test install, and the keyboard gets preserved. So both the LUKS and user passwords with diacritics work OK.
2025-03-11 17:51:42 <@fale:fale.io> feels like there is no decision to be made today. I think we should park it for next time and maybe jednorozec can ping Jiri also for this one
2025-03-11 17:51:44 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> mkolman is showing up as typing… but I think we should move on.
2025-03-11 17:52:29 <@fale:fale.io> !info this will be discussed again next time after we get info from jkonecny 
2025-03-11 17:52:30 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Sounds good.
2025-03-11 17:52:40 <@fale:fale.io> !topic RPMSuportForSystemdSysusers
2025-03-11 17:53:02 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 was marked as implemented in F42 
2025-03-11 17:53:11 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Golang 1.24
2025-03-11 17:53:30 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 seemed mostly done. Needed to check with owner
2025-03-11 17:53:45 <@fale:fale.io> Has someone managed to check with alexsaezm ?
2025-03-11 17:55:02 <@fale:fale.io> Seems not. I can take it as an action
2025-03-11 17:55:27 <@fale:fale.io> !action Fale will check with alexsaezm on this
2025-03-11 17:55:36 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Tcl/Tk 9.0
2025-03-11 17:56:04 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 it was decided that additional info were required from the change owner
2025-03-11 17:56:46 <@fale:fale.io> !bug 2337584
2025-03-11 17:56:59 <@fale:fale.io> it seems like this one depends on still many open bugs
2025-03-11 17:57:05 <@zodbot:fedora.im> RHBZ#2337584 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2337584): [Changes Tracking]: Tcl/Tk 9.0
2025-03-11 17:57:37 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> There is a compat package. 
2025-03-11 17:58:01 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> There was a problem that R-devel would require this tcl8-devel compat package, which conflicts with tcl9-devel.
2025-03-11 17:58:10 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> This would cause problems during upgrades.
2025-03-11 17:58:22 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think the dep in R-devel was dropped.
2025-03-11 17:58:48 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> So I think this is generally OK. The build failures will need to be resolved, but we don't need to block on that.
2025-03-11 17:59:49 <@fale:fale.io> I think it is cleared then for our our concern
2025-03-11 18:02:49 <@salimma:fedora.im> if it's for F42 should the status still be assigned? 
2025-03-11 18:03:51 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I changed it to ON_QA now.
2025-03-11 18:04:25 <@fale:fale.io> Do we want to revisit it next time?
2025-03-11 18:07:17 <@fale:fale.io> oki
2025-03-11 18:07:29 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think we don't need to. 
2025-03-11 18:07:44 <@fale:fale.io> !info The change seems to be ok and not to be re-discussed next time
2025-03-11 18:07:45 <@fale:fale.io> XD
2025-03-11 18:07:54 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> git gui works. That's the primary use case for tk ;)
2025-03-11 18:07:56 <@fale:fale.io> !topic LLVM 20
2025-03-11 18:08:26 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 it was marked as needing additional info from Change Owner and QA
2025-03-11 18:08:46 <@fale:fale.io> sorry. missread :/
2025-03-11 18:08:52 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> llvm-20.1.0-1.fc42 was built 2025-03-05.
2025-03-11 18:09:06 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 it was schedule to happen late, nothing to do
2025-03-11 18:09:20 <@fale:fale.io> !info Koji uses Red Hat Image Builder locally
2025-03-11 18:09:38 <@fale:fale.io> !info on 25/02 it was marked as needing info from Change Owner
2025-03-11 18:10:25 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> > This will hopefully happen after beta as koji was a bit more difficult than I anticipated, mostly regarding how we execute in buildroots and we're currently in freeze. We're also working on (some) infrastructure related bits which can be tracked here (https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12587). Since it doesn't affect the artifacts produced, only how they are produced I feel this should still be OK and the change doesn't need to retargeted to Fedora 43 but let me know what you think :)
2025-03-11 18:11:43 <@salimma:fedora.im> if they think it's low risk that's probably alright
2025-03-11 18:11:46 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12587 is still open.
2025-03-11 18:12:07 <@salimma:fedora.im> but I'd rather it not happen right after beta freeze, to give people the chance to land blocked changes first
2025-03-11 18:12:09 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Yeah, I think we should let this be and revisit next week.
2025-03-11 18:13:37 <@fale:fale.io> !info we will need to revisit it next week
2025-03-11 18:13:52 <@fale:fale.io> !topic current meeting
2025-03-11 18:14:33 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> There was no answer to the request for update in the tracker bug.
2025-03-11 18:14:47 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Sorry, that is for the next topic.
2025-03-11 18:14:55 <@fale:fale.io> it feels like the current meeting has lost the majority of the participants and we finished the system-wide changed. Does it makes sense to continue today or should schedule the self-contained for next week?
2025-03-11 18:15:44 <@salimma:fedora.im> we can do another round of checks who's still around
2025-03-11 18:16:04 <@salimma:fedora.im> had to multitask a bit, and I have a hard stop in 15 mins
2025-03-11 18:17:42 <@fale:fale.io> oki then
2025-03-11 18:17:50 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I'd be fine with breaking off here.
2025-03-11 18:17:53 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Next week's chair
2025-03-11 18:18:09 <@fale:fale.io> makes sense
2025-03-11 18:18:09 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I don't think we need to take any action on the self-contained changes now.
2025-03-11 18:18:19 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> We should look at them again after beta is released.
2025-03-11 18:18:26 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I can do it.
2025-03-11 18:18:36 <@salimma:fedora.im> I can chair next week
2025-03-11 18:18:39 <@fale:fale.io> !action zbyszek will chair next meeting
2025-03-11 18:18:45 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Open Floor
2025-03-11 18:18:48 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh sorry
2025-03-11 18:18:53 <@salimma:fedora.im> zbyszek already volunteered
2025-03-11 18:19:37 <@fale:fale.io> if noone has anything, we can wrap it up :)
2025-03-11 18:20:41 <@salimma:fedora.im> 10 mins back to everyone :)
2025-03-11 18:21:02 <@fale:fale.io> !endmeeting